A liquid chromatograph mass spectrometer (LC/MS) or gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GC/MS), which is composed of a chromatograph and a mass spectrometer, is capable of creating a mass spectrum at an arbitrary point in time based on data obtained by an analysis on a sample, as well as creating a chromatogram, such as a total ion chromatogram or a mass chromatogram for an arbitrary mass-to-charge ratio m/z. With an ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometer, Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer or similar analyzing system, it is possible to create an absorption spectrum, reflection spectrum or similar spectrum based on data obtained by an analysis on a sample.
In recent years, the data processing in those types of analyzing systems has been predominantly performed by a multi-purpose personal computer. In such a system, various kinds of data analyses are performed and their results are displayed by executing a dedicated controlling and processing application software program installed in a personal computer. The results of those analyses are not only presented in-situ but can also be pasted in a document, such as a written report or presentation material.
When it is necessary to examine an analysis result obtained by previously described analyzing systems or compare the results of analyses performed on a plurality of samples, an analysis operator appropriately selects spectra, chromatograms or other kinds of graphs as needed and makes them shown on a screen so that the operator can closely examine the waveform of a portion in question of the graph or compare a plurality of waveform shapes. To allow such analytical work to be performed smoothly, conventional analyzing systems have the function of showing a plurality of windows on a monitor screen, with a chromatogram, mass spectrum or similar graph placed in each window, and allowing the analysis operator to appropriately change the size and position of each window so that the comparison of the graphs or other tasks can be easily performed.
For example, Patent Documents 1 and 2 disclose a display control system which displays a graph, such as a chromatogram or mass spectrum, in each of a plurality of areas formed by dividing the inner area of one large window (those areas are called “tile windows” in Patent Document 2). In this type of display form, users can easily change the size of each area by performing a drag operation on the frames separating the areas, using a mouse or similar pointing device. However, transposing the graphs individually shown on the areas requires cumbersome operations, and in this respect, it can be said that the degree of freedom for the graph arrangement is low. This type of display is normally realized by a software system called the “tiling window manager.”
Patent Document 3 discloses another type of commonly known display form, in which one completely independent window is created for each graph. This type of display system allows users to move each window to an arbitrary position on the display screen by a drag-and-drop operation using a pointing device. The resizing of each window is also easy. Due to these features, this system can be said to have a higher degree of freedom of display and operation than the aforementioned tiling-window display system. Such a display system is normally realized by a software system called the “compositing window manager.”
Even in the case where graphs are placed on the respective independent windows as in the latter system, if users want to compare the results of analyses performed on the same sample under different conditions or to compare the result of a target sample with that of a control sample, it is necessary, for example, to resize the windows, with the graphs to be compared displayed thereon, to the same size and arrange them side by side or in a vertically stacked form. In many application software products which are capable of this kind of display control, the aforementioned arrangement is realized by a process including the following operations and steps.
(1) First, among a plurality of windows on the display screen, the operator sequentially performs a click or similar operation using a pointing device on the windows shown on the display screen to select target windows in an order in which the windows should be arranged. Upon this input operation, the computer internally stores the order of selection of the windows as “window arrangement order information.”
(2) Next, the operator specifies an arrangement pattern, such as a longitudinal (vertical) or lateral (horizontal) direction, through the selection of a menu item or similar operation. Upon this input operation, the computer internally converts the window arrangement order information into “spatial window arrangement information”, which is necessary for arranging the windows, according to the specified arrangement pattern.
(3) According to the calculated spatial window arrangement information, the computer internally re-orders and arranges the target windows, and eventually shows them on the screen of a display unit.
FIGS. 9A and 9B show one example of the operation of arranging the windows according to the aforementioned procedure. In the example, three windows 101, 102 and 103, in each of which an MS/MS spectrum created by a mass spectrometer is placed, are to be vertically arranged on the display in order of the scan number (“Scan”) indicating the order of the mass scan. Suppose that the initial arrangement of the windows 101-103 on the display screen is as shown in FIG. 9A: windows 101-103 vary in size and partially overlap each other, without being arranged in order. On this screen, the operator clicks each of the windows 101-103 in the order in which the windows should be arranged. Now, suppose that the three windows 101-103 have been clicked in the order of [1], [2] and [3] as indicated on the right side of FIG. 9A.
Next, the operator performs a predetermined operation, whereupon an arrangement pattern specification dialogue 110 as shown in FIG. 4 appears on the display screen. On this dialogue 110, the operator selects one of the options of the arrangement pattern as desired. Now, suppose that a “Show Windows Stacked” option has been selected and is specified on the arrangement pattern specification dialogue 110. According to this selection, windows 101-103 are adjusted to the same size and arranged in the specified order, as shown in FIG. 9B. If a “Show Windows Side by Side” option is selected and specified on the arrangement pattern specification dialogue 110, the three windows 101-103, with the lateral width adjusted to the same value, are arranged side by side on the display screen.
However, the conventional process of arranging the windows by the previously described operations and processes has the following problems.
(1) The operation of specifying the arrangement order of the windows by the operator is performed along the time series, while the actual arrangement of the windows is in accordance with the spatial order on the display screen. The correspondence between the temporal sequence information and the spatial sequence information is definitely determined in the software, but operators often incorrectly recognize this correspondence. For example, in the previously described case of showing the windows in the vertically stacked form, the windows will be sequentially arranged in the bottom-to-top direction on the screen according to the temporal order of the click operation (the earlier the click, the lower the position). However, some operators erroneously assume that the windows will be sequentially arranged in the top-to-bottom direction. In this case, the arrangement result will be opposite to what is intended by the operator.
(2) When sequentially selecting a plurality of windows, the operator must repeat the selecting operation while memorizing the order of the windows which have already been selected. If there are many windows to be arranged, the operator will easily make mistakes, such as an omission or double selection of a window, so that it will be more difficult to have the windows arranged in the correct order which fully reflects the intention of the operator. Furthermore, if an error of the order of selection is found in the middle of the process of sequentially selecting the windows, the operator must restart the entire selecting operation from the beginning, which is cumbersome and time consuming. The lack of a means for easily correcting the order of selection in the middle of the process also puts a psychological burden on the operator.
(3) In the case of a one-dimensional arrangement, such as the vertical or horizontal arrangement, it is comparatively easy to recognize the correspondence between the temporal sequence information indicating the order of selection of the windows and the spatial sequence information indicating the order of arrangement of the windows. However, in the case of two-dimensionally arranging the windows in the form of a matrix with specified numbers of rows and columns, the operation is so complex that it is difficult for operators to intuitively understand the operation. This is because there are several possible rules for selecting windows, and the operator needs to memorize which of those selection rules is specified. For example, the rule may require the windows to be selected in such an order that each row is sequentially selected in the top-to-bottom direction and the windows to be placed in the selected row are individually and sequentially selected in the left-to-right direction. Therefore, the operability in the case of the two-dimensional arrangement is not very high. It is also difficult to prevent errors in the operations.